Home / General / TrumpCare: Republican Class Warfare

TrumpCare: Republican Class Warfare



Finally, someone is standing up for our wealthiest citizens and the lives of endless luxury they deserve.

Two of the biggest tax cuts in Republican proposals to repeal the Affordable Care Act would deliver roughly $157 billion over the coming decade to those with incomes of $1 million or more, according to a congressional analysis.

The assessment was made by the Joint Committee on Taxation, a nonpartisan panel that provides research on tax issues.

It is not unusual for tax cuts to benefit mostly the wealthiest, but still save some money for a majority of Americans. But the benefits of these reductions would be aimed squarely at the top.

The provisions would repeal two tax increases on high earners enacted in 2010 to help pay for the Affordable Care Act: an increase in capital gains taxes and other investment-related income, and a surcharge on Medicare taxes.

People making $200,000 to $999,999 a year would also get sizable tax cuts. In total, the two provisions would cut taxes by about $274 billion during the coming decade, virtually all of it for people making at least $200,000, according to a separate assessment by the committee.

“Repeal-and-replace is a gigantic transfer of wealth from the lowest-income Americans to the highest-income Americas,” said Edward D. Kleinbard, a professor at the University of Southern California law school and former chief of staff for the Joint Committee on Taxation.

And by deserve, the rich have the right, nay, the duty, to drink champagne and brush their teeth with luxury toothpaste while watching the poor suffer and die. What a good time it will be!

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Q.E.Dumbass
    • NewishLawyer

      I generally believe that there is such a thing as quality when it comes to consumer goods and am willing to spend for quality but most of these strike me as the very definition of homogenous goods. A toothbrush is a toothbrush. Maybe the ones with elevated bristles are better but that is about it.

      It’s like people who think Arco sells lower quality gas because the price is low and they make you pay cash.

  • DamnYankees

    The more it becomes obvious that this bill is basically designed to just destroy the health care system of rural red America, the less I find myself all that bothered by it. Maybe I’m a bad person, but fundamentally I can’t really get that invested in preventing people from getting harmed by the thing they voted for. I mean, they voted for this with arms wide open. Let it happen. If people don’t like it, maybe they will learn what it means to vote for people who promise to do this. And if they do like, then ok – they won the argument and they like it.

    I just have no desire to save people from the results of their own votes, and while I recognize there are poor people and blue voters in these areas that will be effected, I just can’t rouse the passion within myself on this one. When I look inside myself and ask why I want to fight this, it’s mostly because I don’t want to see this corrupt, awful, evil political party get a political victory. Which is not a good reason to do stuff.

    • I’m this attitude will work out well for you. And for the 40% or so people in red states who voted for the Democrats.

      • Srsly Dad Y

        Damn Yankees indeed.

      • DamnYankees

        I only have so much emotional capacity. On the list of things that I’m going to rile myself up about in these dark times, protecting people from their own votes just can’t be that high on the list. If we weren’t banning immigrants and Muslims, bringing back torture and letting our government become infested with corruption, then I’d probably care about these people more. But I just can’t. Like I said, it might make me a bad person, especially since I’m in an economically privileged position. So be it. But these people who voted to take away their own health care just aren’t number 1 on my emotional priority list. At least not today – maybe I’ll change tomorrow.

        Would I vote for this pile of crap? No. Will I let myself sit back a little and passively view the carnage while I invest emotionally and financially in other things a little more? Sure.

        • Thom

          Maybe you missed the part about people in so-called red states who vote Democratic. I am one, and I rely on the ACA. In other respects, your attitude is very Republican, lacking any human compassion.

          • DamnYankees

            I’m sorry for you that you live in a red state that is represented by people who are going to screw you. That genuinely sucks. But I’m sorry, its not my fault. It’s not like I’m the one voting for these people. I’d vote against this bill if I had that power, and I voted for people who will be voting against this bill. I don’t think merely saying “I can’t muster up a ton of emotional outrage on behalf of a coalition committing sepukku” is worthy of being told I lack all human compassion. I feel for you. I also feel for other people, and feel the need to prioritize.

            • The Dark God of Time

              You can't free a fish from water.

            • Moondog von Superman

              Are you a citizen of the United States, the country that elected Donald Trump and a Republican Congress? If so, shame on you, you should fuck off and die.

              • DamnYankees

                That’s a really unfair think to say about Erik. Why would you want him to die?

            • Frank Wilhoit

              Note carefully what is important here. It’s not the amount of collateral damage. It’s not the particular victims of the collateral damage. It’s the indifference to collateral damage.

              • DamnYankees

                I’m not indifferent to it. It’s awful. But there are lots of other things causing direct and collateral damage as well, and I’d rather spend my emotional energy on those things.

                This really isn’t that complicated.

          • efgoldman

            Maybe you missed the part about people in so-called red states who vote Democratic. I am one, and I rely on the ACA.

            Hell, there are an awful lot of us in BLUE states – very blue states – who rely on the ACA; mrs efg, for one.
            You may take your economic privilege and shove it up you Republiklown ass with a rusty flaming chainsaw.
            Thank you for your support, asshole.

        • Robespierre

          Fuck you.

    • Whirrlaway

      It will get personal when the tubercular degenerates and their uneducated offspring come over your back fence with their pitchforks.

      Yes, you’re a bad person, as well as self-destructive.

      • DamnYankees

        Yes, you’re a bad person, as well as self-destructive.

        This is a very weird reaction to someone saying they oppose a bill and would vote against it, but just can’t rile up the same emotional anger against it when compared to other horrible things going on. But, you’re entitled to think what you like I suppose.

        • Whirrlaway

          I’m punching a fascist here. Please go wipe your nose.

          Admin: the autoplay movie trailer that gets served this morning is totally messing up the scrolling (Chrome) unless I kill it first thing

    • NewishLawyer

      Ah the HL Mencken definition of Democracy.

  • Peterr

    With apologies to Emma Lazarus:

    Not like the New York giant of green fame,
    With pale torch aloft – gift from foreign land;
    Here at gated hospital doors shall stand
    A mighty accountant whose vast spreadsheet
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and his feat
    Making of Money. From his typing hand
    Glows wealth for the rich; his wild eyes command
    The doors behind which healing arts remain.
    “Keep, socialists, your wretched poor!” cries he
    With silent lips. “Give me your scared, your rich,
    Your frightened masses yearning to pay me,
    The fearful wealthy of your teeming shore.
    Take your poor and ill, send them far from me,
    First pay the man beside the gated door!”

  • anonymous

    Republican thinking is simple. If we don’t need it, we don’t want to pay for it. But the moment we need it, we change our mind. Its purely selfishness and unprincipled.

    I recall many examples of Repugs who were anti-ACA until they were stricken with cancer and then were pro-ACA when it saved their lives. And people wrongly celebrated their change in attitude.

    Instead they should have been condemned as only caring about themselves and not living up to their anti-govt principles. The ones willing to die for their principles are the ones to “celebrate”. The ones changing because their lives are on the line is hardly remarkable.

  • NewishLawyer

    I can’t remember where I read it, maybe in the Atlantic, maybe a Rick Perlstein article, but sometime during the 1960s (late Eisenhower or early Kennedy admin), there was a Rich People’s Convention in Southern California and they all got together and basically demanded a really huge cash payment from the United States government along with shutting down all the social programs.

    And the 1960s was a very different time because we were closer to the Great Depression and WWII. People still believed in the power of government.

    For whatever reason or reasons, a large chunk of the wealthy in the United States have always believed that nothing is more horrible than taxation and a more equal society. Somewhere along the line, they managed to convince many working-class people of this as well. John Steinbeck’s “temporarily embarrassed millionaires” was a spot on observation that has been made again and again in different guises and times.

    I am not sure what the left’s answer is here. The vague hippism of “money is only a social construct”* or reminders that you can’t take it with you don’t do any good. Upper-middle class liberalism is slightly hypocritical here because we don’t object to our own comforts and we use our connections and success levels to let our children (myself included) explore interests that are not economically well paying but we help them in the end get to an upper-middle class status usually.

    So I’m stumped as to what to do about the “temporarily embarrassed millionaires” attitude in the United States because it was what leads to these kind of regressive taxes.

    *I see this expressed in various ways and times to time among my lefty friends and I have no idea what it means. Of course money is a social construct but it is a very old and useful one because trade and barter are incredibly hard. Money is easy.

    • Redwood Rhiadra

      I see this expressed in various ways and times to time among my lefty friends and I have no idea what it means. Of course money is a social construct but it is a very old and useful one because trade and barter are incredibly hard. Money is easy.

      What they mean is “money is a capitalist social construct” which is responsible for all the evils of capitalism and won’t be necessary in the Glorious Workers’ Paradise (according to Marxist doctrine – the state simply gives you all the resources you need in a pure communist society.)

      Far too many leftists here in the US still don’t understand that Communism just does not work.

  • No Longer Middle Aged Man

    Genuine question here because I don’t follow the particulars of either the ACA or the current bill very closely. IF the current bill were:
    1. stripped of the tax provisions (cuts for wealthiest), or if at least they were significantly reduced
    2. maintained the current bill’s approach to subsidies (tax credits) and penalties
    3. maintained the Medicaid expansion and indeed expanded it to all states – no longer for each state to choose but rather, no you have to take it

    Then how unacceptable would it be? I know #1 is the point, or at least a major objective, #2 is inferior to the current exchanges though the exchanges aren’t looking so great at the moment, and #3 is a deal breaker for the Freeedom Caucus and the other wingers but that some Republican governors and Senators want to keep the expansion rather than phase it out.

    I know this may be a fantasy, but if you were a Democrat member of the House or Senate could you work within these parameters? Because #3 would help a lot of the people who most need the help and #2 might work for some of the others. I know it would be a big win for Trump (f*ing ugh) but if it meant maintaining healthcare coverage for a lot of people?

    • Peterr

      how unacceptable would it be?

      To the GOP, of whatever variety, it would be completely unacceptable. No tax cuts? Please. Mandating Medicare expansion, after they took it to the Supreme Court to beat this down? Give me a break.

      Given that, speculating on how Democrats would react is kind of beside the point.

      • No Longer Middle Aged Man

        I agree there would be Rep opposition to this but the question is how universal so I don’t think Democrat votes necessarily are irrelevant.

        If you keep the tax breaks … if that really is THE point then how many beyond the Freedom Caucus are absolutely wedded to the idea of destroying Medicaid? Cruz, Paul and some others absolutely want the latter but do you think McConnell is that committed if he can have the former? How about Trump: if he can get tax cuts and something that has his stamp on it — even more so if passed with some Democratic votes — do you think he gives that much of a shit about destroying Medicaid?

        • Hogan

          Turning Medicaid into block grants is in effect destroying it, whether they call it that or not. How many Republicans do you think will vote against that?

    • sharonT

      The entire point of the bill is the tax cut. The House leadership needs to push this tax cut through so the overall federal revenue number is low enough that the even larger tax cut that they plan to propose gets a decent score from the CBO. They have to work from a lower revenue base to comply with the rules under bills that use reconciliation as a mechanism for a 50+1 vote in the Senate.

      Once I read about this maneuver in an article yesterday, I had an, “Ah, ha, moment.” The back door redistribution of wealth was always the crime that animated the passionate opposition to the legislation by the GOP. screwing poor and middle-class citizens was just the cherry on top.

  • smott999

    My fervent hope is that Ryan et al severely miscalculated how many Trump voters are on/need Medicaide. It’s not just worthless POC.
    It’s aging white conservative voters. And this is going to hit them where it hurts and maybe make them pay attention.

    We’ve all talked about what portion of Trump voters can be peeled away, and how…the Dems’ work may be done by Ryan here. I hope.

  • Dr. Ronnie James, DO

    Can we now stop calling it Trumpcare like it’s just his version of the ACA, and start calling it something like “Millionairecare”?

    • efgoldman


    • Mike G


  • Brett

    That is Trump’s face when you catch him stealing the “Free Parking” money.

It is main inner container footer text